Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed July 22, 2026 has been received, Claims 1-11, 13-15, and 18-31 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
1. Claim(s) 15, 18-19, and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meir (US 2014/0245545).
Regarding Claim 15, Meir discloses an article of footwear, comprising: an upper (Fig.13) comprising a knitted component (1300; para.85) comprising: a heel portion, a lateral midfoot portion (midfoot at 1304), and a medial midfoot portion (midfoot at 1305)(see annotated Figure below); a first knitted tubular structure integrally knitted with the lateral midfoot portion, the first knitted tubular structure extending upward from the heel portion proximate a biteline (1304,1305) of the article of footwear to an opening (i.e. opening of 1342 with 1344) in a convergence region (1310,1312,1313) in a throat area of the upper (see annotated Figure above & Fig.11); a second knitted tubular structure integrally knitted with the medial midfoot portion, the second knitted tubular structure extending upward from the heel portion proximate the biteline (1304,1305) of the article of footwear to the opening (i.e.rearmost opening of 1342 with 1344) in the convergence region in the throat area of the upper (see annotated Figure above & Fig.11); and a tensioning element (1340) that extends through the first knitted tubular structure and through the second knitted tubular structure (para.86), wherein the tensioning element extends out from the knitted component through the opening in the convergence region to form an exposed segment of the tensioning element outside of the knitted component in the throat area of the upper (as seen in Fig.13), wherein each of the first knitted tubular structure and the second knitted tubular structure comprise a first boundary (i.e. rear side edge of 1342) and a second boundary (i.e. forward side edge of 1342)(as seen in Fig.13).
PNG
media_image1.png
756
713
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 18, Meir discloses an article of footwear of claim 15, wherein the first knitted tubular structure and the second knitted tubular structure meet and are joined at a heel seam (1306,1307; para.85)(as seen in the annotated Figure above).
Regarding Claim 19, Meir discloses an article of footwear of claim 15, wherein the first knitted tubular structure and the second knitted tubular structure each extend upward diagonally from the heel portion (as seen in annotated Figure above), the second boundary (i.e. left side edge of 1342) being proximate to the biteline (1304,1305) located between the upper and a sole structure (110)(para.46 & 48; as seen in Fig.2 & 4B), wherein the first boundary (i.e. rear side edge of 1342) represents a first edge and the second boundary (i.e. forward side edge of 1342) represents a second edge where a first layer and a second layer start to separate to form the first knitted tubular structure and the second knitted tubular structure, respectively (para.86; as seen in Fig.11, 13 & 14).
Regarding Claim 22, Meir discloses an article of footwear of claim 15, wherein the tensioning element (1340) forms a single exposed segment (i.e. one rearmost 1344) outside of the knitted component (as seen in Fig.13).
Regarding Claim 23, Meir discloses an article of footwear of claim 15, wherein the first knitted tubular structure and the second knitted tubular structure each comprise a first knit layer and a second knit layer that are integrally knit and partially unsecured to define a corresponding channel (para.86; as seen in Fig.13 & 14), and wherein a single tensioning element (1340) extends through the corresponding channel of the first knitted tubular structure and through the corresponding channel of the second knitted tubular structure (as seen in Fig.13 & the annotated Figure above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
2. Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meir (US 2014/0245545) in view of Moudgil (US 11,793,267).
Regarding Claim 20, Meir discloses an article of footwear of claim 15, wherein the first knitted tubular structure forms a first folding area (i.e. area of 1300 behind lateral, rearmost vertical 1342) and the second knitted tubular structure forms a second folding area (i.e. area of 1300 behind medial, rearmost vertical 1342). Meir does not explicitly disclose wherein when force is applied to an exterior side of the heel portion, the knitted component is biased to fold at the first folding area and the second folding area along the first boundary so that the heel portion is folded down and extends into a foot-receiving void defined by the upper. However, Moudgil teaches a heel portion (109) wherein when force is applied to an exterior side of the heel portion, the knitted component is biased to fold at a first folding area (i.e. lateral side of 109) and a second folding area (i.e. lateral side of 109), so that the heel portion is folded down and extends into a foot-receiving void defined by the upper (as seen in Fig.1A & 2A; Col.3, line 45-Col.4, line 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the heel portion of Meir to fold down, as taught by Moudgil, in order to provide a shoe with an easy entry configuration for the user to quickly don a shoe when needed. When in combination, Meir and Moudgil teach the knitted component is biased to fold at the first folding area and the second folding area between the tensioning element positioned at the first and second tubular structures and the heel portion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11, 13-14, 21, and 24-31 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant's amendment, the search has been updated, and new prior art has been identified and applied. Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN E LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-3267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00am-4:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alissa J. Tompkins can be reached at 571-272-3425. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MEGAN E LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights